Click here for Adobe Acrobat version
Click here for Microsoft Word version

******************************************************** 
                      NOTICE
********************************************************

This document was converted from Microsoft Word.

Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.

All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.

Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.

If you need the complete document, download the
Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat version.

*****************************************************************



                           1.   Before the
                Federal Communications Commission
                     Washington, D.C. 20554


                                )
                                )
In the Matter of                 )
                                )
R & G DISTRIBUTORS, INC.         )    File No. EB-01-IH-0017q
OCN# 6841                        )    NAL/Acct. No. 200132080048
                                )    FRN 0003-2716-16
                                )
                                )


                        FORFEITURE ORDER

   Adopted:  June 7, 2002               Released:  June 11, 2002

By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:


                        I.   INTRODUCTION

In this  Order,  we  issue  a  monetary  forfeiture  against  R&G 
Distributors, Inc. (``R&G'') for willful violation of 47 C.F.R.  
52.15(f).  The noted violation  involves R&G's failure to  report 
its number utilization and forecast data.  Based upon our  review 
of the  facts and  circumstances of  this case,  including  R&G's 
response to  our  Notice  of Apparent  Liability  (``NAL''),1  we 
conclude that R&G  is liable for  a forfeiture in  the amount  of  
$6,000.

                         II.       BACKGROUND

On April 24, 2001, the Chief, Enforcement Bureau, acting pursuant 
to delegated authority, issued the NAL to R&G, proposing a $6,000 
forfeiture. We issued the  NAL because it  appeared that R&G  had 
failed to  report on  its  actual and  forecast number  usage  by 
filing FCC Form 502, the North American Numbering Plan  Numbering 
Resource Utilization/Forecast (``NRUF'') Report  that was due  on 
September 15, 2000.2   Carriers are required  to report for  each 
separate legal entity represented by an Operating Company  Number 
(`OCN'').3 It appeared that R&G failed to file an NRUF report for 
one  OCN,  which  was  referenced  in  our  NAL.   We   therefore 
determined that R&G had  apparently violated section 52.15(f)  of 
the Commission's rules,  which requires  U.S. carriers  receiving 
numbering  resources  from  the  North  American  Numbering  Plan 
Administrator (``NANPA''),  a Pooling  Administrator, or  another 
telecommunications  carrier,  to  report  semiannually  on  their 
actual and forecast number usage.4

R&G responded to the NAL, and  does not contest the finding  that 
it failed to  comply with the  reporting requirements of  section 
52.15(f).  However,  R&G  requests reduction  of  the  forfeiture 
penalty from $6,000 to $3,000.  R&G argues that the Bureau failed 
to adequately explain or justify  its proposed imposition of  the 
upward adjustment  of suggested  base  amount of  the  forfeiture 
penalty   and   that   the   forfeiture   penalty   proposed   is 
disproportionate to the rule violation at issue.

                       III.    DISCUSSION

The NAL  explicitly  states  that  the  proposed  forfeiture  was 
assessed in accordance with applicable statutory provisions,  the 
Commission's rules and the Commission's Forfeiture Guidelines.  5  
Section 503(b)  of  the Act  requires  that, in  examining  R&G's 
response, we take into account the nature, circumstances,  extent 
and gravity of the violation, and, with respect to the  violator, 
the degree of culpability, any history of prior offenses, ability 
to pay,  and other  such  matters as  justice may  require.6  R&G 
asserts that the Forfeiture Guidelines establish a base amount of 
$3,000 for failure to file required forms, but that we failed  to 
adequately explain  why we  imposed  the same  upward  adjustment 
assessed to carriers  with much larger  inventories of  numbering 
resources that had also apparently  failed to file the  September 
15, 2000 NRUF report.  We disagree. 

Our NAL  emphasized the  critical  importance of  consistent  and 
accurate reporting of number utilization and forecast data.7  The 
NAL explained that we imposed an upward adjustment based upon the 
potential harm to the  Commission's numbering administration  and 
optimization caused by non-compliance with section 52.15(f).  The 
amount of the upward adjustment took into account R&G's inventory 
of numbering resources,  which encompasses  multiple NXX  codes.8  
Under  Section  503(b)(2)(D)  of  the  Act  and  the   Forfeiture 
Guidelines, the  Bureau has  broad flexibility  to determine  the 
appropriate forfeiture.9  In this  regard, the upward  adjustment 
creates an  incentive  for carriers  to  report on  their  number 
utilization and  forecast data  in  addition to  recognizing  the 
potential harm to numbering administration and optimization  when 
carriers do  not comply  with  section 52.15(f).10   Although  we 
generally proposed higher forfeiture amounts for carriers with  a 
greater amount  of  numbering  resources at  issue,  we  are  not 
required  to  assess  a   different  forfeiture  based  on   each 
individual carrier's number  inventory.  Thus, we  find that  the 
calculation  of  the   forfeiture  penalty   is  reasonable   and 
appropriate.  R&G's  citation  to  precedent  imposing  a   lower 
forfeiture penalty for  a paging  carrier's unlicensed  operation 
over an  extended period  of  time does  not compel  a  different 
result.11   In  addition, we  decline  to reduce  the  forfeiture 
amount based on R&G's argument that it is an intermediate carrier 
and thus was required to  report only utilization data.  We  have 
reviewed R&G's response  in light  of the  statutory factors  set 
forth above, and find that R&G has not justified reduction of the 
proposed forfeiture. Accordingly, we affirm the forfeiture.

                    IV.     ORDERING CLAUSES


Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant  to 47 U.S.C.  503(b),  and 
47 C.F.R.  0.111, 0.311 and 1.80, that R&G Distribution  FORFEIT 
to the United States the sum of six thousand dollars ($6,000) for 
willfully violating  the  Commission's rules  that  require  U.S. 
carriers to report actual and forecast number usage.

Payment of the forfeiture may be made by mailing a check or money 
order,  payable  to  the  order  of  the  Federal  Communications 
Commission, to the Forfeiture Collection Section, Finance Branch, 
Federal  Communications  Commission,  P.O.  Box  73482,  Chicago, 
Illinois 60673-7482,  within  30  days of  the  release  of  this 
Forfeiture  Order.12    The   payment  MUST   INCLUDE   the   FCC 
Registration Number (FRN)  referenced above and  should note  the 
NAL/Acct. No. referenced  above.  If the  forfeiture is not  paid 
within the  period specified,  the case  may be  referred to  the 
Department of Justice for collection pursuant to 47 U.S.C.  504.  
A request for payment of the full amount of this Forfeiture Order 
under an installment plan should  be sent to: Chief, Revenue  and 
Receivables Operations Group, 445 12th Street, S.W.,  Washington, 
D.C. 20554.13

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Forfeiture Order  shall 
be sent by Certified   Mail/Return Receipt Requested, to  Eziquel 
DeLa Torre, R&G  Distributors, Inc., 1665  W. 68th Street,  Suite 
201, Hialeah, FL   33014, with a  copy to its  counsel, Henry  A. 
Solomon, Esq.,  Garvey, Schubert  & Barer,  1000 Potomac  Street, 
N.W., Washington, DC  20007.


                         FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
                    

     

                         David H. Solomon
                         Chief, Enforcement Bureau


_________________________

1  See R and G Distributors, Inc., 16 FCC Rcd 8665 (EB 2001).   

2  The NRUF reports are  due on or before  February 1 and on  or 
before August  1 of  each year.   See 47  C.F.R.   52.15(f)(6).  
However, we note that the deadline for filing reports due August 
1, 2000 was extended to  September 15, 2000. Numbering  Resource 
Optimization, CC Docket No. 99-200, 15 FCC Rcd 17005 (2000).   

3   See 47 C.F.R.  52.15(f)(3)(ii).  

4 Numbering Resource Optimization, Report and Order and  Further 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking  in CC Docket  No. 99-200, 15  FCC 
Rcd 7574  (2000)(``NRO  Order''); recon.  and  clarification  in 
part, Second Report  and Order, Order  on Reconsideration in  CC 
Docket 96-98 and CC Docket 99-200, and Second Further Notice  of 
Proposed Rulemaking  in  CC Docket  99-200,  16 FCC  Rcd  306  ( 
2000)(``NRO Recon. Order'').

5  47  U.S.C.   503(b);  47  C.F.R.   1.80;  The  Commission's 
Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment of Section 1.80 of the 
Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture Guidelines, 12 FCC Rcd 17087 
(1997),  recon.  denied,  15  FCC  Rcd  303  (1999)(``Forfeiture 
Guidelines'')(codified at 47 C.F.R.  1.80(b)(4) Note).

6   47 C.F.R.  503(b)(2)(D).

7   Id.     

8  R and G Distributors, 16 FCC Rcd at 8667. 

9   47 U.S.C.  503(b)(2)(D).  See Forfeiture Guidelines, 12 FCC 
Rcd at 17100 (1997).  See, e.g., SBC Communications Inc., 16 FCC 
Rcd 12306 (2001).

10 See 47 C.F.R.  1.80(b)(4) Note.

11 Teton  Communications Incorporated,  10  FCC Rcd  8832   (WTB 
1995).  

12   See  47 C.F.R.  1.80(h).  

13   See 47 C.F.R.  1.1914.